Comments by "Al Loomis" (@alloomis1635) on "Is America's Militia Problem Growing?" video.

  1. i'm afraid you are wrong. militias don't beat armies. but a society that uses a militia rather than a professional army can avoid the burden of expense, and put the money to more productive uses. the militias didn't beat the professional armies, the societies that relied on them outlasted their attackers. even the nva didn't beat the usa in the field, but they did demonstrate that victory in the field did not necessarily mean victory in the war. essentially, militias tire out professional armies, discourage invading governments, and exhaust their taxes. the viet minh and viet cong never won battles, but, with the nva, they did outlast french and usa. even more so in afghanistan. the special forces could go anywhere, kill any resistance, but usa had no reason to occupy afghanistan so the taliban could always recover and continue their 'hopeless' resistance. the real power of militia is not their efficiency, which is variable. but the winning power of militia is in being too much trouble to beat, for small reward. the real weakness of militia is the kill ratio: it is hard to maintain courage if the enemy is killing 10 for every 1 you get.
    2
  2. mr. hartmann, shame on you! militias are the keystone of democracy. and helvetia, the only democracy, defends itself with militia, not armies. of course, you don't know what a democracy is, so you don't understand the role of militia. a democracy is a state ruled by its citizens, not by politicians. armies are the tools of elites, capable of aggressive war. militias fight in defense. at home.
    1